Archaeology and the Bible.

[Mickiel]

The " Ishtar Gate" is one of the most impressive monuments discovered in the ancient east. The impressive gateway led past Nebuchadnezzars place to the 7 storied " Ziggurat", crowned by the temple of Marduk. The famous " Hanging Gardens" of Babylon were in the back of this palace. The hanging gardens were built by Nebuchadnezzar for one of his wives. Nebuchadnezzar is a biblical characther, they have unearthed his likeness on coins, sheilds and walls. They have found his palaces and the hanging gardens.

Peace.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Mickiel

Even hisrorical writers who were secular give evidence of Jesus. Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Josephus, Lucian of Samosata and the Babylonian Talmud all mention Jesus. These writers were not a part of some elaborate hoax, they were historians and relevant to their times.

Peace.

Perhaps I could ask for the name of the book in each case so that I can go and check? This is the easiest of your claims for you to provide references for, I'm trying to make it simple for you. If what you claim here is true I'll eat my hat, how's that?

You could even try to really impress the thread's readers by giving the relevant quote from each book rather than just a list of authors.

[Mickiel]

Originally Posted by spot

Perhaps I could ask for the name of the book in each case so that I can go and check? This is the easiest of your claims for you to provide references for, I'm trying to make it simple for you. If what you claim here is true I'll eat my hat, how's that?

You could even try to really impress the thread's readers by giving the relevant quote from each book rather than just a list of authors.

Your trying to make it simple for me. I don't need your help, and have not asked for it. I am not trying to impress readers, they can just as easy research for themselves, I didnot need anyone to research for me.

As far as you eating your hat, I couldcareless what you eat or why. You don't understand me, and you don't understand why I write.

I don't write to impress people.

Peace.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Mickiel

Your trying to make it simple for me. I don't need your help, and have not asked for it. I am not trying to impress readers, they can just as easy research for themselves, I didnot need anyone to research for me.

As far as you eating your hat, I couldcareless what you eat or why. You don't understand me, and you don't understand why I write.

I don't write to impress people.

Peace.

"they can just as easy research for themselves"? You quote five AUTHORS and expect us to work out what passages you're referring to? Come on, play the man, tell us where to check.

[Mickiel]

Originally Posted by spot

"
Come on, play the man, tell us where to check.

I am not playing, and there is nothing you can do to dictate the terms from which I write. Now if you had a different aittitude in your approach to me, I would have responded differently. But I do not have to accomidate sarcasm, rudeness, disrespect and other aittitudes you display.

I don't like how you approached me, so I don't have to do anything for you.

Peace.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Mickiel

I am not playing, and there is nothing you can do to dictate the terms from which I write. Now if you had a different aittitude in your approach to me, I would have responded differently. But I do not have to accomidate sarcasm, rudeness, disrespect and other aittitudes you display.

I don't like how you approached me, so I don't have to do anything for you.

Peace.

Then I note in the thread that, having some familiarity with your claimed sources, they don't in the least say what you've claimed they contain. I also note that I disagree with your interpretations of other "evidence" - the Black Obelisk, for example, gives no hint of where your biblical king reigned, your ossuaries are challenged by rather more credible archaeologists and your coins are scarcely proof of any biblical event. As for "the actual tomb of Lazarus" the only possible response is derision.

As to why you write, I'd put that down to a demand for belief from someone lacking faith.

[Mickiel]

King Solomon built pools to bring water into the city of Jerusalem, Eccles. 2:6, they have found these pools. Some years back construction workers built a new road from Jerusalem to Bethlehem and unearthed a conduit of Solomons. Solomon loved Silver and Gold and he built a seaport on the Red Sea ( Aqaba Gulf) and a Navy to import these metals, much of which came from Ophir ( 1Kings 9:26-28) Archaeologist unearthed a piece of pottery which mentions Ophirs Gold, this , along with an inscribed stamp found at ancient Bethel, gives Archaeological evidence, not only of Ophir having an abundance of Gold, but that extensive trade was carried on between Israel and Sheba. Which supports the queen of Sheba's vist to see Solomon, 1Kings 10:1-13.

They have discovered Solomons Pool, and his Copper Mines.

Peace.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Mickiel

They have discovered Solomons Pool, and his Copper Mines.

The bible claims Solomon had copper mines? I think not.

[Mickiel]

Originally Posted by spot

The bible claims Solomon had copper mines? I think not.

In 2Chronicles 9:13-28, it reveals that King Solomon not only had the mines, but he had Ivory, Silver, Gold, Ships, garments, weapons, Spices, horses, mules, 4,000 stalls for the horses which arechaelogist have unearthed with many of the tie post still intact, he had 12,000 horsemen. It is said thay he made Silver as if it was common as a stone.

Peace.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Mickiel

In 2Chronicles 9:13-28, it reveals that King Solomon not only had the mines, but he had Ivory, Silver, Gold, Ships, garments, weapons, Spices, horses, mules, 4,000 stalls for the horses which arechaelogist have unearthed with many of the tie post still intact, he had 12,000 horsemen. It is said thay he made Silver as if it was common as a stone.

Peace.

Do you know, there's not a word there in "2Chronicles 9:13-28" about Solomon owning a single mine at all. Not even an implication of a mine. Much less a copper mine.

What's been unearthed is a copper mine which might, depending on how you juggle the dates, just possibly overlap with some bible-scholars' proposed chronology that there was a king then called Solomon, though the bible doesn't give the least reason for anyone assuming that he ruled anywhere near where the mine's been found. As justification for "They have discovered Solomons Copper Mines" it's not even a tenuous association. Rather like the rest of your thread.

Let me see whether this way of putting it makes sense. If this thread was posted by a Muslim making an equivalent set of claims about Islam, you'd be mocking it to pieces and laughing your head off at the folly shown by the poster. All that's keeping you to your course is your need for belief.